I am saying you aren't as helpless as the narrative you are trying to create..... Obviously big business has the most resources and you Progressive can't figure out how to win elections outside of very liberal districts. Trump figured it out and took over the GOP. Trumpers do the same thing..... "the media and establishment is against us"........ When your narrative is just the opposite of Trumpers..... then maybe you should rethink it.
If all the wage does is provide the bare minimum for a human to show up to work the next day, that's slave wages. If that is all the wage allows, it's slave wages. The wages don't even offer enough for someone to have full healthcare coverage because you don't need someone working menial labor to have healthcare to show up to work the next day. It might effect them later on in life but menial labor is easily replaceable so no need to pay them anything beyond what is necessary to show up next day.
I agree.... it's remarkably stupid and insulting to change the definition of slavery to prop an argument that you already had broad support for.
Someone who has a learning disability where they cannot do anything beyond menial labor and doesn't have a fall back like parents or family have no practical choice.
Again, no its not. It's a simple, well understood term to describe a working wage that is insufficient to meet basic needs. It's not meant to imply people are slaves, it means exactly as described above. And it is not hyperbole. People seeing the word slave and freaking out.
Coincidentally I work for a company that gets those with Intellectual Developmental Disorders their medications. ACA increased for funding for such things as we didn't exist beforehand. There are quite a lot of government projects at various levels to help with that. Does the system need to be better? Sure, but it sounds like you are just trying to appeal to emotion.
Nope its a bastardization of the term wage slavery and anytime you use the word slave it implies they are slaves. Its a reason why people freak out seeing the word slave tossed around inappropriately, the fact that you don't see why says that you don't respect what slaves have actually went through. There is a reason Slave is used and its to get a reaction, why use it otherwise?
Hyperbole is a more of a literary device.... so technically it's "exaggeration". I stand corrected. Slaves can't decide to call in sick or not show up. You've lessened slavery in order to prop up your wage narrative when you really didn't have to.
So we need to supplement businesses with public financing so their employees have a living wage? All that tells me is these businesses don't have a viable business model.
In fairness, someone who is depending on low hourly pay to support themselves or a family doesn't really have the freedom to call in sick or not show up either. Technically they do, but then they won't have enough to eat or pay the bills. Their freedom isn't the same as the freedom of a CFO who calls in sick. I get the point, and I'm not trying to detract from the conversation, which I'm enjoying.
This is literally one of the dumbest conversations I have ever had. You ever heard of a slave cylinder? Were the partisan mechanical engineers seeking to exaggerate the auto component to generate narratives. How about a chief of staff? You think the business world is trying to pretend to be Indians? These are called words and they have context. Can there be confusion on this absolutely. The context has literally been spelled out. I'll never understand how politics makes people go absolutely brain dead.
We could also give it to the individuals instead of relying of businesses. LOL. You are just full of progressive buzzwords and saying. Businesses plan based off current laws and rules..... Why is it the role of the business to provide everything?
That's a pretty poor attempt.... there's nothing slave-ish about what's happening. I think in the context of mechanical engineering, no one would be confused or upset. In the context of "chief of staff", how long has that been in the lexicon? Just stop.... you twisted a word in order to prop an argument that you already had superiority on.
Listen to yourself. You are asking why an employer who has you work 8 hours a day should provide you everything and when you are referring to "everything" you are referring to basic living essentials.... Like that's how employment works. Your employer provides you everything... Because that is your source of income that you invest 40+ hours a week into. You can say they don't have a viable business model if their business model needs to skirt basic morality. What Nike did with child sweat shops overseas is legal. It's "viable" if you just look at the laws on the books. It isn't viable when you consider sustainability and morality.
Wow! Do you not know why it's called a slave cylinder? It's because its totally at the mercy of the master cylinder and can't act independently. Thanks for making my point for me.
And why would it be....? I'm not arguing that it's fair, just that the "slave wages" isn't a good narrative and is more evidence of Progressives inability to read a crowd. Half my family were rice farmers or machinists in East Texas/ Southern Louisiana. They either moved into O&G/found new careers or got hooked on opiods/extreme poverty. I just see a different world than many on here. I don't believe people are inherently helpless as many Progressives do.
